|
Submenu |
Mediation and Family Violenceby Patricia J. Haverstick, MCC U.S. Women's Concerns Anabaptists have long been involved in conflict transformation, restorative justice, and mediation practices. Because of the strong support of these programs within our communities and churches, we are often proud of our involvement (for the most part, we should be). However, sometimes this leads us towards engaging in conflict mediation prematurely or in situations where it is inappropriate. One of these situations is in cases of family violence. To use mediation in cases of family violence and abuse is faulty because it is like equating abuse with a "misunderstanding" or a lack of communication. If discussion and compromise could solve family violence situations, these situations would be diffused much earlier because part of being a victim is trying to appease the abuser in whatever way possible. The process of mediation assumes that both parties will cooperate and stand by any agreement that is reached; when in fact, the victim has already been trying to cooperate with the abuser and the abuser does not cooperate in return. Also, if a victim is honest about her experiences and desires within the mediation process, she will almost certainly be abused more later for sharing her experiences. Therefore, the mediation process turns into a no win situation: either the victim is not wholly or truthfully participating, or the victim is put into more danger (or both!). The intent of the mediation is lost. By implying that there is equal responsibility between the abuser and victim (as community mediation implies*), we are again making the victim responsible for the abuser's behavior, and the abuser is absolved of his responsibility for his bad choices. If a mediated agreement is reached, the victim also faces the likelihood that when she "breaks" her part of the agreement, the abuser then has the "right" to abuse her as punishment for not holding up her part of the bargain. Helpful and safe family violence interventions empower the victim to achieve control of the situation. When we impose intervention that is not directed or owned by the victim (couples counselling, mediation, etc.), we are continuing the cycle of abuse. If we care about peace and justice, and the safety of individuals, we will not mediate any issues between perpetrators and victims of family violence. After all of this has been said, it is also important to acknowledge that mediation is occurring in cases of family violence. However, the practitioners who engage in this process are often careful to note that they are mediating the issues of domestic violence (for example, child custody in a divorce case where one spouse had been abusive or when family members join together to intervene/confront the abuser). They also are very specific as to which cases of family violence can be mediated. To read more on this topic, see the articles "Restorative Justice with Respect to Domestic Violence and Sexual Abuse" by Heather Block and Chris Lichti (www.uua.org/cde/csm/restorative.html) and "Domestic Violence and Restorative Justice: Advancing the Dialogue" by Alan Edwards and Jennifer Haslett (www.voma.org/docs/DVandRJPaper2003.pdf). *This is in reference to community mediation rather than victim offender mediation. In victim offender mediation, a key component of this mediation philosophy is that there is not "equal responsibility" between parties and that the victim should not have to "negotiate" with the offender.
Ideas and inspiration were drawn from "Mediation and Domestic Violence: Two Views; 'No'" by Rose Garrity; found in the Mediation and Facilitation Training Manual, 4th edition. This training manual was created by and is available from Mennonite Conciliation Service (MCC U.S.). In the future, look for more information on this topic from the MCC U.S. Women's Concerns program and the MCC U.S. Office on Crime and Justice.
Additional resources (for study and reflection)
Top |
|
|
